Doctoral programs should look beyond their departmental boundaries and seek out professionals in the university, many of whom may not be regular faculty members, who can provide useful mentorship to graduate students, as a group and individually. Just as graduate learning should not be limited by departmental boundaries, neither should it forgo the expertise of the university’s highly trained staff members such as librarians, information technology staff members, museum personnel, administrators, and others who can support graduate students in familiarizing themselves with digital humanities, nonacademic career paths, and other specializations that doctorate recipients pursue.
[Next recommendation: Redefine the Roles of Faculty Advisers]
In reading the report, I’m struck by a key parallel I see between the issue of academic and research libraries needing to stay relevant (especially in the face of changing technologies, world domination by Google, and the altered meaning of “place” in the context of libraries) and the issue that much of graduate education as it is carried out at the doctoral level is irrelevant (hence the need for reform). I see a huge opportunity for research libraries to partner much more explicitly and strategically with graduate schools, much the way libraries have partnered with instructors of undergraduates to integrate information literacy programming in the curriculum. I wonder if this is something the CIT could work on with another committee or group in the MLA , or – even bolder – if the MLA could collaborate with the Association of College and Research Libraries on developing strategies or recommendations?